Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> ATM, Optics and DIY Forum

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)
GlennLeDrew
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048171 - 08/27/13 03:29 AM

Malden,
I've already made a precisely accurate diagram which well illustrates the concept, in the bottom panel. Another version based on the iris having moved to the edge of the exit pupil will be functionally the same, except that the reduced aperture will have moved to the opposite edge of the objective.

The Wiki article you linked to does not get into the detail and the specifics I'm addressing here.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MKV
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 01/20/11

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048192 - 08/27/13 04:15 AM Attachment (10 downloads)

Quote:

Jon,
As I stated, for the reduced iris condition, as the small iris moves laterally across the larger exit pupil, the reduced aperture at the objective correspondingly sweeps across the objective. And so, yes, the full aperture *can* be utilized, but *never at any one time.* If the iris is 1/2 the exit pupil, never more than 1/2 the objective contributes to image formation. As the iris wanders, that 1/2 objective diameter reduced aperture region also wanders about the objective.

I guess I'll have to prepare a diagram like that in the bottom panel, but for the case where the iris is abutting the edge of the exit pupil (as opposed to being in the center.) Then one would see that the reduced aperture at the objective is still just as small, but offset so as to abut the objective edge.

This in no way means that the objective is ever working at full aperture. Just because one has the freedom to let the iris wander, and thereby utilize different parts of the objective at different times, is not the same as utilizing the full objective at one instant. And so at any one time the instrument is always working at reduced aperture.




Glenn this is exactly what I see when I use SONY DSC HX-1 camera and a relay scope to capture interferograms. The picture below shows a pupil that cuts off part of an 8-inch f/3 mirror. You can move left and right, as if peeking through a keyhole, and see more of the mirror, but not at the same time. So clearly, I am seeing only a small section of the image, however the image is s till a full-aperture image; its just that you don't see all of ti at once.

regards,
Mladen


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Crayfordjon
Vendor - Zerochromat
*****

Reged: 06/17/09

Loc: UK
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048193 - 08/27/13 04:15 AM Attachment (15 downloads)

Here is an optical diagram which explains clearly what happens when the iris is smaller than the exit pupil of an eyepiece. The resolving aperture diameter is generated by the diameter of he iris "d", rays entering at an angle from the edge of the OG define the field angle of the focal plane, although the resolving aperture is smaller than the OG aperture"D", the whole of the OG aperture is still used, as is illustrated.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048215 - 08/27/13 05:05 AM

Hi-

I think this original post is overall correct but I would add a few things that are relevant to the discussion. First, I think that talk about entrance and exit pupils should be in the context of object space and image space. In this view, the pupils are defined differently from the way Glenn presents.

Normally, an optical system has a single physical aperture in it that limits its throughput, and the entrance pupil is the image of that stop as seen from object space. The exit pupil is the image of that stop as seen from image space. Since they are both images of the same thing, the two pupils are conjugate - and any other images of that stop are also pupils. But the entrance and exit pupils are defined in different conceptual spaces, and they are formed from entirely different optical components viewing the same physical stop.

This is important because it's not just the size of a pupil that matters, but its location in the corresponding space. It's ironic that Glenn is providing details on the definition of these pupils, because I have been making the same points in discussions of the so called "flashlight test" to measure aperture - the accuracy of which depends critically on the location of the pupil when some stop near the image plane is acting as the aperture stop.

The location of the pupils is similarly important when doing afocal imaging with a digital camera. It's not just the size of the pupils that matters, but their locations. The exit pupil of a normal afocal telescope will have some size and location in the image space behind the eyepiece. Meanwhile, if you look into a digital camera, you will "see" the entrance pupil of that camera as an image of its iris, formed by the lenses in front of that iris. It will have some apparent size and apparent depth into the camera - indicating its location and size in object space as you look into it.

In order to avoid vignetting, the entrance pupil of the camera needs to be big enough *and* close enough to the exit pupil of the telescope. Typical digital camera lenses have the entrance pupil fairly deep inside the lens, behind the front element. In that case, even if the camera entrance pupil is bigger than the telescope exit pupil - if it is too far back the vignetting can be severe.

If the entrance pupil of the camera is smaller than the telescope exit pupil, then now the iris of the camera is the aperture stop of the overall system, and the entrance pupil has a size and location unrelated to the telescope objective. The entrance pupil is the image of that iris as seen from object space, looking through the objective, the eyepiece, and the front elements of the camera lens ahead of the iris.

When I see afocal images taken through a telescope, the vignetting is a mixture of the small size of the entrance pupil of the camera, combined with its distance from the eyepiece, limiting the result. If you can't get the camera lens physically close enough to the eyepiece then there will be vignetting. If the camera lens aperture is too small, then the aperture of the system is reduced and the location of the entrance pupil is unknown without a ray trace.

Similar problems show in Foucault test images, where it is difficult to get the entrance pupil of the camera close enough to the knife edge to get a full view of the mirror.

In all these discussions, the physical size of the front lens of the camera isn't what's important, but instead its the stated aperture of the lens - i.e. its entrance pupil diameter - combined with the location of that entrance pupil (which itself is an image) in image space behind the eyepiece, or knife edge.

Frank

Edited by freestar8n (08/27/13 05:12 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: Crayfordjon]
      #6048219 - 08/27/13 05:25 AM

Although your diagram shows that the full aperture is "used" - different parts of the aperture are used for different points in the field. This means the objective is acting more like a field stop than an entrance pupil. This is in fact the case for a Galilean telescope, where the human iris is the aperture stop of the system. The field becomes vignetted and the objective acts as the field stop.

In terms of both the entrance pupil diameter and diffraction performance, the full objective aperture is not being used. The aperture is only helping to reduce vignetting across the field.

Since the entrance pupil is much smaller than the objective, the f/ratio of the system is much greater than would appear using the objective aperture as the entrance pupil diameter. The objective has no connection, in size or location, to the entrance pupil of the overall system - and it's the entrance pupil diameter that determines throughput, diffraction performance, and the effective speed of the system. Since the system is slower, it improves the aberration performance by being stopped down.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GlennLeDrew
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6048249 - 08/27/13 06:36 AM

Jon,
Your diagram does not address the matter of the reduced iris. You've made the iris large enough to accommodate the full light bundle from the objective.

Execute another version, but 'pinch' down the observer's iris to 1/2 the diameter as made here. You will find that the central 1/2 of the objective is now contributing to image formation.

And by the way, the label, "half field angle" is not correct, as it's referring to the semi-angle of the light cone for an image point, which is a reflection of the t/ratio. The two sets of rays you draw come to a common focus at the field center. And so the top set are really paraxial, or parallel to the optical axis, being rays from the on-axis image point. Rays which emanate from any angle off axis do not come to focus on the optical axis.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GlennLeDrew
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048256 - 08/27/13 06:45 AM

Frank,
You raise valid points, of course. But it would be preferable that the fundamentals are assimilated before drilling down into that kind of detail. If the very concept of the reduced aperture is not fully understood first, further confusion can only follow.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048270 - 08/27/13 07:08 AM

I think that in many situations the details of how pupils are defined are unimportant - but when it comes to aperture reduction and so forth - more rigorous adherence to the formalism has clear benefit. That's why the formalism exists in the first place. In order to talk about the entrance pupil of a system, you need to establish what is acting as the physical stop, and then determine the entrance pupil diameter and location, you need to do a ray trace of that stop through the optical elements in front of it. Once you establish the resulting image of that stop, it has a size and location - in object space - and *that* is the entrance pupil.

When a small camera lens, or human iris, is placed some distance behind the eyepiece, its size *and* location both determine the size and location of the entrance pupil. If the limiting aperture is not at the location of the exit pupil of the telescope, then the corresponding entrance pupil of the system will not be conjugate with the objective - and the objective will act as a cross between a field stop and an aperture stop.

There is nothing hard to understand about where the pupils end up - because it is just a ray trace. And I think it is all much clearer if you stick to the formalism that has been established - because it becomes critical in discussions like these.

You have to ask - what is acting as the physical aperture stop, what is the resulting image of it, where is it, and how big is it. If the aperture stop is not at a location conjugate with the objective, as happens with an afocal digital camera, these details become essential.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GlennLeDrew
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture [Re: freestar8n]
      #6048324 - 08/27/13 08:08 AM

Frank,
To help in the obtaining of an understanding of the *basics*, I'm limiting to the ideal case of a system whose entrance pupil is always the objective. That is, we're not concerned with restrictors between objective and field stop for any and all field angles. Furthermore, we're assuming there is no impediment to getting the iris in the plane of the exit pupil.

Would you agree that this is a valid approach to follow in the quest for an understanding of the *fundamentals*? Until this has been achieved, is it not wise to defer the plunging into the subtler details regarding internal stops and longitudinal displacement of iris and exit pupil?

I gather you're still skeptical about the flashlight test, or even its superior variant, the beam-expanded laser test. If so, we two have a seemingly intractable and fundamental disconnect in communication on the matter of pupils. Can you imagine the poor neophyte's head scratching when straying from the more important basics too soon?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GlennLeDrew
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048404 - 08/27/13 09:02 AM Attachment (12 downloads)

To show how a small iris, as it moves around within the confines of the larger exit pupil, continues to project as the same-diameter reduced aperture, I've overlaid additional light ray bundles to the bottom panel in my original illustration. This was the quicker expedient, and I beg your forgiveness for the clutter.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I have not moved the eye downward the required distance of 1/2 the iris diameter. You are unfortunately asked to imagine this instead.

As noted, the eye/iris is located centrally--on the optical axis--within the larger exit pupil. The envelopes of light bundles for image points from the top edge (blue), middle (white) and bottom edge (red) of the FOV are drawn as lines only. Because the iris is centered, all light bundles which contribute to image formation on the retina pass through the central part of the objective.

For reference, note the three relevant diameters indicated (drawn inside the eyeball circle); the centered iris diameter and location as drawn, the iris position when offset to the bottom edge of the exit pupil, and the full exit pupil diameter actually produced by the optics.

Added in solid fills of the same color scheme as before are the light bundles which would be accommodated when the iris is moved downward until it just 'touches' the edge of the exit pupil. The portion of the objective now utilized is at the top edge.

But note this important fact; the view angle has not changed. The field of view is centered on the very same point, and does so always. As will be stressed again, we are merely sampling a smaller portion of the full envelope of light the instrument can field.

Let's say the exit pupil is 6mm and the iris is 3mm. The system is thus stopped down to half its actual diameter, and the image is 1/4 as bright. If the objective were, say, 60mm in diameter, it's now working at 30mm. As long as the iris wanders about within the confines of the exit pupil, there will be no pupil clipping, and so the image brightness remains constant. While this is going on, the image of the iris projected onto the objective moves around within the confines of the objective, always as a 30mm diameter aperture.

Once the iris crosses the edge of the exit pupil, its image crosses the edge of the objective, the resulting pupil clipping causing image diminution.



Here's how to see all this in operation. On a piece of paper or cardboard, cut out a hole no larger than 1/2 the objective diameter. (A smaller hole makes for a more dramatic demonstration!) Place the sheet in front of the objective. While looking at the exit pupil, move the hole about in front of the objective. Note how the reduced exit pupil moves about, just like a miniature version of what's going on up at the front end. This can be easier to see if you first make a reference surface from a piece of tracing paper which has a circle drawn upon it equal to the unobstructed exit pupil diameter, held motionless in the plane of the exit pupil. And a long focal length eyepiece, making for a larger exit pupil, makes things easier to see as well.

As you know, the hole in the card is simply an aperture mask, like those used for stopping down scopes to yield sharper planetary views. Just as the smaller, offset objective mask results in a correspondingly smaller exit pupil similarly offset, so does a small iris at the exit pupil do the very same in reverse. At all times--in both situations--one is merely sampling a smaller portion of the full light bundle the scope is capable of accommodating. In terms of image brightness and resolving power (neglecting for the moment the matter of increased aberrations which can be introduced by the peripheral areas of optical elements), neither the optical system nor your eye cares a whit what portion of the entrance/exit pupil is being utilized.

Let's imagine that on a bright day your scope is producing an 8mm exit pupil. You install an objective mask which produces a 2mm exit pupil. Let's say your daytime-restricted iris is also 2mm. To see anything like a full-brightness image, you must locate your iris pretty darn precisely (to within 1/2mm anyway). If the objective mask was placed at the objective's edge, the reduced exit pupil would be offset to the edge of the 'native' 8mm exit pupil.

Now we remove the mask, and the exit pupil becomes 8mm. Does the image get any brighter? No, bacause your 2mm iris is still stopping down the system. If your eye meanwhile remained perfectly motionless, the very same portion of the objective which was used with the mask in place is still being used now. You could hold your hand up in front any other part of the objective and it will have absolutely zero impact on the view. Moving your iris about within the confines of the 8mm exit pupil only results in a different portion of the objective contributing to image formation at any one moment.

In this example, with mask in place or your iris by itself stopping down the system, the aperture is reduced to 1/4, the working f/ratio of the objective increases by a factor of 4, the image becomes 16X dimmer (compared to the full exit pupil), and for the on-axis iris at least, all telescope system aberrations are reduced. This holds true wherever the iris falls within the exit pupil. Whether it's the eye or an afocal camera behind the eyepiece, these are inviolable facts, as long as the iris can be brought to the plane of the exit pupil.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dan_h
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 12/10/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6048410 - 08/27/13 09:04 AM

Quote:

There is nothing hard to understand about where the pupils end up - because it is just a ray trace.




If that were the case, this thread would not exist.

dan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048430 - 08/27/13 09:19 AM

I think it should be pretty obvious to anyone, using simple descriptions and few details, that viewing through an eyepiece with an iris smaller than the exit pupil, will result in a loss of throughput - and an effective loss of aperture. But there is confusion in the subsequent discussion about all the aperture "being used" - and the challenges of afocal imaging with a digital camera.

Your original post here doesn't come across as intended to be simplified - it sounds like it is meant as a formal description of pupils and how they work. In that regard I think it is good to point out, for example, that the exit pupil is not defined as "an image of the entrance pupil." Both pupils are images of the physical aperture stop, as seen from different spaces, and as formed by the subset of elements in the path to the aperture. That is a very different description from yours, it is consistent with the formal definition, and it elucidates concepts critical to a non-confused discussion of what happens in afocal camera imaging.

The flashlight test is definitely a bad way to measure aperture - in general - precisely because it assumes the entrance pupil is near the objective. This is not the case when you have a limiting stop in an unusual location - particularly near the focal plane - as happens with e.g. binoviewers or using a camera afocally.

As an aside - remember that you did change the flashlight test to the "collimated laser" test - due to its inadequacies. I thought we had made at least that much progress on the topic - but now I see people talking about the flashlight test again - so there was some ground lost. In many topics such as these, a clear understanding of pupils and how they work is essential and can't be glossed over, which is why I was somewhat surprised you took on the task to give a tutorial on pupils.

For both the flashlight test and afocal imaging, the location of the pupil is critical, and the simplifying assumptions that make it easier to visualize will prevent an actual understanding of how it all works.

I can see maintaining a simplified version of this topic in a beginner section, but not in this forum where more advanced topics come up all the time - and there is generally a desire to adhere to formalism and nomenclature.

Anyway - basic concepts of pupils and how they work should be Optics 101 - and are normally in the introductory material of an optics text. I don't know why you consider it to be an advanced topic in the first place.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: dan_h]
      #6048464 - 08/27/13 09:38 AM

Quote:

If that were the case, this thread would not exist.




My point is that even with the complete definition of pupils and how they work, determining their sizes and locations is a matter of simple ray tracing and linear imaging. It's not like it introduces quantum optics or even aberration theory. It's a simple definition and a ray trace - in both directions - from what is determined to be the acting aperture stop.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GlennLeDrew
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6048489 - 08/27/13 09:55 AM

Frank, while a bit off topic, the flashlight test makes absolutely no assumptions whatsoever about where a restricting stop might lie in the system. That's the beauty of it. It simply defines the full envelope of on-axis light that can enter the objective and make it out the eyepiece. No matter where a restrictor might lie.

Parallel light into the eyepiece and parallel light out the objective traces and delineates the one and same envelope of light coming into the objective and which makes it out the eyepiece.

I introduced the laser refinement only so as to ensure the tiniest point of light at the common eyepiece/objective focus, which ensures the sharpest shadow edge, even for a restrictor which might lie not at all far from the focus. For most optical systems, as long as the flashlight source delivers a reasonably sharp and unambiguously measurable circle of light out the objective, it can be taken as sufficiently reliable.

The sharpness of the shadow is what is an indicator of validity.

I can see that a new thread, illustrated, is what's required.

This flashlight test issue between you and me is the equivalent of this current thread between Jon Wall and myself.


That most everyone is remaining on the sidelines while we 'titans' clash (in a good way!) tells me that such topics as these are not fully understood by the vast majority of amateurs. Hence my desire to aducate, but hopefully in a way resembling measured steps. If I diverge from canonical definitions, that's a result of my own ignorance. And due to the kinds of simplifications and stripping down to essentials I'm striving for.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #6048520 - 08/27/13 10:15 AM

I don't consider the flashlight test entirely off topic - it's actually pertinent. And I fully support an opportunity to educate about the concept of pupils. But I recommend sticking to the formalism more - not just to be fancy - but without it, you can come to very wrong conclusions.

If you recall, it was trivial for me to place a small aperture near the focus of an sct and measure the entrance pupil with the flashlight test - and get a very real looking measurement that was completely wrong. There was nothing subtle about it - it was a great looking, and completely wrong result. The way to understand why the test failed so demonstrably was to draw a simple diagram showing the size and location of the entrance pupil - which emphasized the need for a very accurately collimated beam - which then led to the collimated laser test. In order to make the flashlight beam collimated, you have to hold it far from the eyepiece - in which case very little light gets through - again because of the flux received by that small "entrance pupil" (the exit pupil of the eyepiece in reverse). So when the flashlight is properly placed, the image with large aperture scope is much fainter - which again leads to the need for a laser.

If you place a flashlight near an eyepiece the beam will not be collimated and it will be divergent - which will generate a large error in the shadow size if the entrance pupil is far from the objective. This is optics/pupils 101, and I strongly encourage you to read up on it - both as it relates to the flashlight test, and to afocal camera imaging.

The definition, size, and location of the pupil is critical when it is created by an aperture stop that isn't at a "normal" location conjugate to some primary element. This happens all the time and should be handled properly - and it really isn't hard to do if you assume knowledge of ray tracing - which I believe is pretty safe in this forum.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6048552 - 08/27/13 10:35 AM

Quote:

I think it should be pretty obvious to anyone, using simple descriptions and few details, that viewing through an eyepiece with an iris smaller than the exit pupil, will result in a loss of throughput - and an effective loss of aperture.




It's not so clear to everyone and historically this has been an issue that has been discussed with some heat. In particular, the issue of the resolution loss caused by an aperture masked by the iris. Several years ago Alan French was in a heated discussion on this very topic in the Astromart forums.

In the current CN binocular forum, there are those who gained understanding from Alan's careful explanation of this particular issue though he was one against many..

'nuff said.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #6048625 - 08/27/13 11:19 AM

OK - well it does seem odd to me consider how basic it is compared to much more advanced topics discussed here. I'm all for elucidating it especially if people are interested - but if this is a known topic of contention, then I think it is even more important to treat it more rigorously. I don't know about the discussion you are referring to - so I can't comment on the treatment it gave on the topic.

I'll try to put some diagrams together, but at the same time - the basic concepts of pupils are treated in most any text on optics - but people seem to regard the entrance pupil as some very obvious lens or physical hole - when it often isn't so simple.

Separately - the questions about coupling a camera to a telescope afocally cannot be discussed properly without explicitly dealing with the location of the camera pupil relative to the eyepiece. Since that topic is intertwined this the one regarding the more basic aperture reduction caused by a small human pupil - I think it makes sense not to oversimplify the discussion.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6048640 - 08/27/13 11:34 AM

Quote:

Separately - the questions about coupling a camera to a telescope afocally cannot be discussed properly without explicitly dealing with the location of the camera pupil relative to the eyepiece. Since that topic is intertwined this the one regarding the more basic aperture reduction caused by a small human pupil - I think it makes sense not to oversimplify the discussion.




This discussion did start out addressing aperture masking and the human eye.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MitchAlsup
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 08/31/09

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: SACK]
      #6048672 - 08/27/13 11:57 AM

Quote:

Hi Mitch,
How does the lit retina create the background glow? How bad is it? I have not noticed before but sounds interesting and good to know for eyepiece selection.




Light bounces off the iris and then illuminates the cornea from behind causing what looks a lot like skyglow.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: Why a too-small iris results in reduced aperture new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #6048675 - 08/27/13 11:59 AM

OK. Then - if the eye pupil is physically located at the exit pupil of the eyepiece, and if the eye pupil is smaller than the original exit pupil - is there anyone here who still thinks the effective aperture, for collecting light or for diffraction resolution, has not been reduced?

Note that this is separate from the full aperture "being used" to reduce vignetting as you look around the scene or something.

Is there anyone here who thinks the full aperture and speed of the lens is being used in this situation, for on-axis image quality and brightness?

If so - can you describe why that would be?

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | (show all)


Extra information
18 registered and 24 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  ausastronomer, richard7, Starman81 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 1684

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics